WHISTANCE v. Flick
290 S.W.3d 813, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1094, 2009 WL 2223031
Opinion
*814 ORDER
David and Nancy Whistance appeal the trial court’s judgment in favor of Cary Diekmann and against the Whistances on their suit for breach of a real estate contract. On appeal, the Whistances claim that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the evidence and is against the weight of the evidence. Because a published opinion would have no precedential value, a memorandum has been provided to the parties.
The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
WHISTANCE v. Flick, 290 S.W.3d 813, 2009 Mo. App. LEXIS 1094, 2009 WL 2223031 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).
290 S.W.3d 813 (WHISTANCE v. Flick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. Williams
290 S.W.3d 813 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2009)